Search

This article is part of a series on “The ROI of Sustainability,” written with the support of MeterHero. MeterHero helps companies and organizations offset their water and energy footprints through consumer engagement. To follow along with the rest of the series, click here.

At Sustainable Brands 2015, we asked thought leaders to define the ROI of Sustainability in their words. In this video, Cindy Drucker of Weber Shandwick shares some thoughts:

https://youtu.be/ts8Pe3auw_8

 

About Cindy Drucker: Cindy is Executive Vice President in Weber Shandwick's global Social Impact practice, focused on sustainability and corporate social responsibility. She brings more than 20 years of senior-level sustainability expertise honed through positions as head of global sustainability for a leading consumer goods company and senior sustainability positions with nonprofit and government entities.

At Weber Shandwick, Cindy helps clients navigate the complexities of sustainability and corporate social responsibility leadership. Cindy provides thought leadership counsel, strategic guidance and program development to a host of global corporate, nonprofit and foundation clients. She also serves as a sustainability partner to external stakeholders such as The Sustainability Consortium, Consumer Goods Forum, World Business Council for Sustainable Development and Business for Social Responsibility. Weber Shandwick is a leading global public affairs and communications firm with offices in 81 countries around the world.

By Abbey Heffer

The world keeps citing the rising number of environmental protests as a sign of China’s impending doom. It is true that the occurrence of such protests has increased by 29 percent year-on-year since 1996; but somehow, strangely, it seems as though the central government is actively encouraging outbreaks of popular protest. If they concern the environment, that is.

Whose war on pollution?

Once upon a time, it could have been easily argued that the Chinese government violently suppresses any instance of social unrest. In fact, such a point could have been easily argued just last week. Perhaps yesterday. But none would have concerned the environment.

It is surprising that environmental protests, which have risen steadily for nearly 10 years, no longer seem to see the traditional levels of social suppression. Have the powers-that-be grown bored or lazy in their bureaucratic lethargy? Are they finding it to difficult to keep up with the rapid-fire, trending-in-two-minutes pace of the Internet age?

Or … Are they supporting social unrest?

Somewhere, somehow, someone has decided that environmental protests actually serve to strengthen the position of the central government, rather than challenge it. Simultaneously, such protests seem to keep local officials on their scapegoated toes, while the Central Party Committee enjoy a position of reverence and moral highness as they declare a vague “War on Pollution.”

No ordinary disruption: Central government support?

Former CCTV host Chai Jing’s "Under The Dome," an interrogative documentary focusing on the deadly levels of smog (wu mai) across China, was published by the Party’s most well-known mouthpiece, the People’s Daily. The documentary conveniently managed to reach between 300 and 400 million viewers before it was “censored” and blocked for Chinese Internet users; and when the Chinese premier Li Keqiang was questioned about it, rather than denounce the illegal video, he fully supported its message and publication.

Environmental issues have also received strangely special treatment by other major government institutions and publications.

Xinhua is the official news agency of the People’s Republic of China and the sole form of communication between the central government and the people. Last month, residents of the southern city of Heyuan, Guangdong province, protested violently against government approval of a coal-fired power plant expansion. According to local government officials, only around 200 people joined the protests. But Xinhua, which described last year's massive Hong Kong protest as little more than an "illegal gathering," reported that “thousands” of people joined the Guangdong environmental protest.

It seems that local governments didn’t get the memo. While the state-governed media inflamed the scale of protests, local governments floundered while attempting to stick to traditional self-censorship, only to find themselves left out on a limb by their Central superiors.

A tale of surprising success

It is even more surprising that many of these environmental protests are seeing success, despite their illegality.

In Ningbo, a city inland from Shanghai, a protest against the construction of a paraxylene plant turned violent as protesters clashed with police. Though arrests were made for violent behavior during the protest, the local government consented to a series of “carefully calculated concessions” in order to defuse tensions.

In July 2013, a “walkabout” protest in Jiangmen, Guangdong, led to the scrapping of a 37 billion RMB (around US$6 billion) nuclear power project. In this case, no arrests were made, and the protest dissolved peacefully as the government accepted the demands of the people.

Why is the government relaxing its stance on political protests and social disorder in the face of ever-increasing environmental activism?

No ordinary situation

It stands to reason that the central government would support and even actively encourage environmental protests. To do so helps raise public support for high-level government spending on the development of renewable energy technologies, and the incredibly expensive task of converting from coal to clean-coal energy production. In the event that taxes must be increased in order to fund large-scale reforms, the government rests assured that it has the financial backing of the people in doing so.

Environment Minister Chen Jining stated earlier this year that the central government has allocated 9.8 billion RMB (US$1.58 billion) in special funds to control air pollution. An additional private investment of 300 billion RMB of private investment was also “leveraged,”

In short, the PR machine of the PRC is working full-speed to preserve regime legitimacy while simultaneously functioning as a working government. But does this reflect strength or weakness? While Forbes votes “weakness in China’s leadership,” others, such as Maria van der Hoeven, executive director of the International Energy Agency, argues that China “deserves more credit” for its strength in pushing for energy reform. Al Jazeera suggested strength when citing the arrest of 8,400 people for “environmental crimes.”

Is this all just one huge case of the Chinese government seeing all, knowing all, but letting some things slide? Or is there a genuine agenda here, assisting the country’s continued clean-up? Is the government instituting some strange kind of societal reverse psychology?

Note: The content of this article does not reflect the official opinion of any unit of the Chinese government. Responsibility for the views expressed in the article lies entirely with the author.

Image credit: Flickr/Lei Han

Abbey Heffer is a satirist, historian and environmental enthusiast from London. Currently working as an investment consultant in Guangdong Province, Abbey is the first foreign woman to be hired directly by the Chinese government. Focusing on China’s troubled relationship with its environment and innovative local solutions to pollution, Abbey’s work can be found online in the ‘Business of Being Critical’: www.beycritical.com<

 

By Giulio Bonazzi

After 25 years in the manufacturing industry, I have become a true believer in the social and economic power of the circular economy. With the world’s population expected to reach 9 billion by 2030, it has become clear that our disposable culture and one-time use model for consumer products is no longer viable.

It’s obvious that the key to meeting future demand will be to move beyond a traditional linear economy where we produce, consume and then simply dispose of products. However, with a population so engrained in the convenience of disposables, this could be easier said than done.

As the world’s population increases, so does demand – which is great for business but bad for the environment. There is not a never-ending supply of raw materials from which to draw, so the manufacturing industry will need to adapt to meet growing demand for synthetic consumer products.

Fortunately, there is a solution in the most unlikely of places – waste. Landfills and other waste streams are goldmines when it comes to creative materials sourcing, and with the appropriate reverse supply chain programs in place, end-use products never have to see a landfill again – they can instead be returned and upcycled into new raw materials.

As environmental consciousness becomes more widespread, consumers are voting with their dollars, further encouraging the sustainable manufacturing trend. And where the consumer dollar goes, the rest of the industry soon follows. In particular, within the carpet, textile and apparel industries, there has been an upswing toward the use of recycled materials in product manufacturing.

However, end-use companies are increasingly looking to move beyond minimal levels of post-consumer recycled content and are starting to shift toward suppliers that take a more forward-thinking approach to production.

As a supplier, Aquafil has proven that it’s possible to remain profitable while promoting environmental and social responsibility through the use of upcycled waste materials. It turns out that waste is an abundant and incredibly useful manufacturing material. Aquafil’s ECONYL Regeneration System was first developed as a sustainable nylon-6 material sourcing solution for carpet and apparel manufacturers and has since scaled into a worldwide operation. The process redirects post-consumer nylon waste from around the world that would otherwise end up in landfills, incinerators and oceans, and upcycles it back to the same quality of the original virgin raw material. The result is nylon-6 fibers made from 100 percent regenerated nylon, such as threadbare carpets and old fishing nets diverted from global waste streams.

An important step in creating a closed-loop manufacturing system is to identify avenues for waste collection and recovery. Reclaiming programs provide a virtually endless supply of waste materials and help to better optimize recovery and reuse by allowing companies in the carpet industry to return their end-of-life products to be regenerated into new virgin material. Several non-profit organizations also exist to aid in waste recovery – such as the Healthy Seas Initiative, a program aimed at recovering and recycling abandoned nylon fishing nets from oceans. Healthy Seas promotes marine protection and reduces ocean debris and is a prime example of how taking a circular approach to business practices and partnerships can yield new opportunities and further drive a company’s sustainability goals.

In order to sustain forward momentum toward a circular economy, there is a need to promote this emerging movement through discourse and collaboration. From a corporate reputation standpoint, it’s crucial for companies to demonstrate their commitment and efforts to promote a sustainable future, and to continue to drive sustainability strategy by adhering to the triple bottom line approach: investing in business practices that promote social, environmental and economic sustainability.

If implemented on a large scale, the waste diversion and reverse supply chain model will encourage a global closed-loop manufacturing economy, completely changing the way companies source manufacturing materials, and providing choices that empower consumers to finally move away from the tired linear one-time use model.

Image credit: Aquafil 

Giulio Bonazzi is the chairman and CEO of Aquafil SpA and an expert in the circular economy. As an entrepreneur, Mr. Bonazzi is not afraid to take risks to see his company evolve and grow. Under his fierce dedication and leadership vision, Aquafil SpA has become an important sustainability leader and a key driver within the synthetic textile industry, with 15 plants in eight countries across three continents. Giulio has been President of CIRFS (European man-made Fibers Association) from 2011 to 2014.

Nestlé Nespresso says it has made significant progress towards improving the lives of thousands of coffee farmers in countries ranging from South Sudan to Colombia, as part of the company's AAA Sustainable Quality(TM) Program.

Speaking on the occasion of the one-year anniversary of The Positive Cup, Nespresso's 2020 sustainability strategy, Jean-Marc Duvoisin, ceo, commented: "Through our sustainability investments, the first steps have been taken to rebuild the coffee industry in South Sudan, and we are helping to initiate a better future for farmers in Colombia through a retirement savings plan.

"These are small steps given the scale of the challenges, but I am proud that we can do our part to help farmers, while securing the future supply of the highest quality coffees for our business and our Club Members."

Nespresso aims to source 100% of its coffee from its AAA Sustainable Quality(TM) Program by 2020. This depends heavily on the extension of the program into Kenya and Ethiopia, to support a more skilled, self-sufficient and sustainable farming community. In the last 12 months Nespresso, working with partnerTechnoServe, have provided training and technical assistance to over 10'000 farmers, and will reach 50,000 farmers by 2020.

In addition to the expansion of the AAA Program in Africa, Nespresso has made progress to implement welfare solutions to ensure that coffee farming remains attractive to younger generations too. Last year it launched a pilot retirement savings plan, together with the Colombian Ministry of Labour, Fairtrade International and local coffee cooperatives. So far 850 AAA Fairtrade certified farmers have entered the retirement savings plan.

Nespresso has also progressed with its agroforestry plan. The reintroduction of trees in coffee producing regions helps protect natural ecosystems, thereby strengthening coffee farms' resilience to climate change and ensuring sustainable coffee production for the future, says the company. Around 130,000 trees were planted in 2014 in Guatemala and Colombia as part of pilot programs.

In the first half of 2015, approximately 200,000 trees have been planted in Ethiopia and Guatemala, and another 300,000 will be planted by the end of 2015 in Mexico and Colombia.

The most interesting wines come from grapes that had to struggle a little bit. As with people, in the world of wines interesting is almost always good. You might recognize Jackson Family Wines (JFW) as the seller of the popular restaurant chardonnay: Kendall Jackson Vintners Reserve. It's the best-selling restaurant chardonnay in the country. In the world of wine, small, unique and batch are selling points; many throw shade on K-J's popular entry-level chards. Wine snobs should note that JFW also makes a lot of interesting-and-delicious expensive wines under a number of labels at dozens of wineries.  With $15 million in savings to date from sustainability initiatives, the company's wine also got a lot more interesting for TriplePundit.

JFW's founder, Jess Jackson, didn't set out to start a business. At the ripe old age of 55, he bought some vineyards intending to be a gentleman farmer. In his second year of production, Jackson faced a buyer's market and decided to make wine rather than sell his grapes at a loss. While his first batch didn't come out so well, he caught the vintner's bug and decided to become a winemaker.

Eighty-five percent of vineyards in Sonoma County, California, where JFW is located, are family owned, so it is no surprise that Jackson brought his extended family into the fold. His son-in-law is the CEO, his daughter Katie is VP of government relations and community outreach, and his second wife has served as chairman for over 25 years.

While he passed away several years ago, on a recent tour of several Jackson Family Wines properties, many employees shared fond memories of Jackson as if he was still at the helm. He built his company with a long-term view reminiscent of the Brundtland Commission's simple definition of sustainability: "development which meets the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." With climate change and water constraints pushing all ag businesses to the brink in California, it is nice to see the Jackson Family Wines leadership carrying on a commitment to building a business that will last for generations.

It turns out conservation pays. JFW has saved $15 million through sustainability programs that include energy efficiency improvements. In addition to the financial savings, the firm has conserved an noteworthy 5300 megawatts of energy per year since 2008 by making energy efficiency a Key Performance Indicator (KPI). That's an impressive 51 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions organization-wide.

Not content to stop there, JFW plans to invest these savings in a Tesla energy storage battery and put solar panels on all of its wineries. The company installed its first fleet of batteries at La Crema winery. The batteries store energy produced by the solar panels so that it can be used when the sun isn't shining. The batteries also help manage costs by predicting usage patterns based on previous years and minimizing load spikes which keeps utility prices low and predictable.

By the end of 2015, JFW expects to be the largest solar producer in the wine industry with 6.5 megawatts providing about 30 percent of its current energy needs. The company has a goal to produce 50 percent of its energy needs from solar power by 2020. Over the 8 years since JFW began purchasing solar panels, the price has dropped by 80 percent, meanwhile utility costs have gone up 3 to 5 percent per year.

Of course, water consumption is a huge concern in any agricultural organization, and water conservation is at top of mind for the management of JFW. The industry as a whole uses and average 6 to 9 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of wine. JFW is currently at 4.5 gallons for each gallon of wine, with a goal to get that number down to 3 gallons. "I look at the [California] drought as a tremendous opportunity to do things right," Julien Gervreau, senior sustainability manager for JFW, explained during a site tour last week.

To make water savings a priority, JFW has put a price on water of 3 cents per gallon so that it can measure savings, even though the company uses largely well water which is currently "free." The winemaker uses a variety of technical solutions to reduce water use like drip irrigation instead of  sprinklers or flooding. It is also trialling buried drip tape which can water the roots directly eliminating evaporation.

Delivering the perfect amount of water is easier said than done in the world of wine. Good wine grapes come from a careful mix of soil, sun exposure and local climate conditions, called terrior. The correct mix takes years of experience to perfect. Grapes grow well on the slopes of hills, which means the terrior can be different from one hill to the next, and the proper water mix might differ as well. By using new technologies like drones to take close-up pictures of the vineyards, JFW can adjust the water volume in near real time. Careful water management becomes a key to growing the grapes that produce interesting-is-good wine, and it saves a bunch of water at the same time.

Other water-saving efforts include triple-reuse in the bottle washing line, wind inversion props to send warm air to the grapes during a cold snap to keep them from freezing (instead of coating all the grapes in water to create an igloo effect), and sending dirty water from the bottling process out to reservoirs where it can find a second life watering the grapes.

Through these efforts JFW has an average water savings of 11 million gallons per year. But all the high-tech stuff doesn't replace good old fashioned employee engagement.

As Mitch Davis, general manager at La Crema explained: "We're a winery; we make a lot of messes. Our first and most effective water savings tools were a broom and a squeegee." It's a good reminder that technology can bring us a long way, but education and common sense are often the right place to start.

Image credit: Jen Boynton

By Emma Bailey

In the Coronado National Forest, high above the saguaro cacti and desert yucca of southern Arizona, Forest Road 42 invites the intrepid motorist to cross creeks, dare winter snows and scale mountain peaks. Thousands of miles to the east, in Jacksonville, Florida, a state-of-the-art arterial highway system leads beach-goers and state senators through sprawling suburbs and across saltwater marshes.

Today, the same car, like a Ford F-150 or Buick Enclave, might see service in both areas. Tomorrow, at least if Google has its way, that may all change.

As of May 2015, Google's fleet of self-driving cars collectively logged more than 1 million miles. During the course of all that driving, they sustained only 12 minor accidents, though "not once was the self-driving car the cause," says program director Chris Urmson.

No one can ignore a car that's been driving itself for the human equivalent of 67 years. On June 25, Google announced the official arrival of its adorable, autonomous vehicles on the public roads of Mountain View, California. This summer the company plans to test its in-house built prototype, a two-seat, koala-bear-cute car equipped with a removable steering wheel, removable accelerator, removable brake and removable human.

Unlike its peers, who will incessantly gripe at its 25 mph maximum speed limit, the Google test car will not drive intoxicated. It will not respond to text messages. It will not fall asleep. It will not daydream about Chris Hemsworth. It will neither respond to raised fingers nor crush roving box turtles.

For that is the dream: a self-driving automobile with the reliability of a calculator. It has been estimated by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that 81 percent of car crashes are caused by human error. Could not those lives, that death lottery, be saved?

Other dreams fall in line. Some 45 percent of disabled American citizens still work. Autonomous cars could empower the other 55 percent. Costs of shipping would plummet as trucking companies lay off drivers. Valets and traffic jams would become as outdated as washboards and VCRs. If 20 percent of all cars were driverless, suggests one source, 724 million gallons of fuel would be saved, probably due to platooning and efficiency algorithms.

There are quagmires, to be sure. Casual automobile use may increase with access to technology, a variant of the traffic generation phenomenon. Expert Don MacKenzie, assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Washington, said that automated driving pathways could lead to a 160 percent increase in automobile travel, bad news for the rapidly dwindling amount of available crude oil and natural gas.

And how would liability insurance be calculated? Who – or what – bears legal culpability in multi-vehicle collision? And all these dreams forget one thing: Forest Road 42 in the Coronado National Forest.

But first, the science:

A multitude of technologies work together to guide the Google driverless car. A GPS system informs the car of general routes and road regulations. A $70,000 LiDAR system, which uses a Velodyne 64-beam laser rotating 360 degrees and capturing 1.3 million readings per second, measures distances to surrounding objects. Stereo video cameras create overlapping fields of vision that record and follow road lines. Radar measures the speed of other cars. Altogether, approximately 1 gigabyte of data is gathered per second and fed into the car's brain to render a three-dimensional map.

Yet the system falters in heavy rains or snow. It flails on unimproved surfaces where road markings – sometimes even a road – do not exist. It cannot identify human hand signals.

Granted, most of the current obstacles to autonomous vehicle adoption can be surmounted. Vehicle-to-vehicle WiFi communication can prevent collisions. RFID chips in road signs can alert driverless cars to icy bridges and construction zones. Of course, these solutions present their own problems. You can hack a WiFi network, for instance. Unless you're a mega-powerful super-alien, you can't hack the human brain.

Where the road of autonomous automobiles will go, no one yet knows. But there will always be places, lost dirt roads and forgotten gravel pathways, where driverless cars will be unknown – because a human, unlike an intelligent automobile, can imagine what's around the next bend.

Image credit: Flickr/Roman Boed

Emma Bailey is a freelance writer and blogger from the Midwest. After going to college in Florida she relocated to Chicago, where she now lives with a roommate and two rabbits. She primarily covers entertainment topics and issues pertaining to the environment. Find her on Twitter @Emma_Bailey90

By Laura Morrissey

People can be difficult in any area of life. At work there has to be a certain way of dealing with people. In a leadership role, we all know that compassion is a necessity, and it would be good to see that being a compassionate leader and positive force pays off and that you have reason to be proud of your subordinates. Sometimes, though, we just don’t see this happen.

As a leader you’ve probably worked incredibly hard to get to where you are now. As someone with no fear of hard work, if your team isn’t do as well as they should, you’re probably the type to roll up your sleeves and work even harder to compensate. It’s in your nature, so that’s what you do.

By doing this, you are enabling this cycle to continue. You might make excuses for your staff or think that you need a different team of people to succeed. While one or two might be somewhat a 'lost cause,' you as a leader are the one that can do things differently and motivate your team so team cohesion and productivity are strong forces in its identity. Your overcompensating in order to set a high standard might be what you think is best for the team, but you are actually failing them by being a defeatist.

People end up in leadership for different reasons. Some aspire for a leadership role. Others fall into it after proving strong in their original job role. The transition from being a standout individual to a responsible manager is a challenging time due to the pressure to see results quickly. For some, there seems to be a knack for getting the best out of people whereas others are promoted into roles for which they aren’t prepared.

So, how do leaders who aren’t defeatists deal with a difficult team? They apply a mirror self image in order to improve behaviors and results within the team.

The mirror self image

The concept of the mirror self image is based on developing a vision in the people you work with, both as a team and individually. Michael Zwell, author of "Creating a Culture of Competence," has written extensively on the analytical shift required to move from story-based models to skills discussion of practical leaders.

Zwell believes that people tend to only do what they believe that they can do, or in some cases, less. We are all limited by our self-image and also derive beliefs about our capabilities based on past happenings. In short, your behavior and the results derived from the past mirror your beliefs. When the self believes in a wider range of possibility, the performance will also stand a chance of improving.

Nothing will change until leaders start to believe in themselves and their people

In most instances, nothing will change until an inspirational leader comes along. Even when this person comes along saying, "I believe in you," to each and every employee, the chances are that very little will change quickly.

It is likely that the workforce you are dealing with will all have different issues that are holding them back, all depending on their past experiences. For example, people that are low in assertiveness probably learned that they shouldn't take the lead or be assertive at a young age. The same principle applies for those who seem to be naturally low in initiative. Not just limited to childhood, negative traits that leave us limited in self-belief can develop at any age if we fall under the wrong guidance.

You, in your leadership role, have the potential to provide your people with a vision of where they are going and convince and inspire them there is a way of getting there together.

Connect the dots

A good manager of people will help every individual to connect the dots from corporate vision to the self and how each individual's behaviors and performance impact corporate success in terms of fulfilling the vision. This needs to be done in a way that suits each individual. Managers need to know what motivates every individual to create visions for individuals becoming bigger and better.

An organization's productivity is a direct result of the quality of the vision of its employees. Communicating the vision correctly and positively is the key. Restrictions can appear in the form of not wanting to correct or lecture individuals or not offering inducements or rewards because you feel the vision should be motivating enough in and of itself.

Invite the individuals that you lead to turn your visions into reality, and work with them to develop practical pathways for the investment of more effort and time into their personal and professional development. If they see you care about them, they will want to succeed in their jobs. Cohesive team coaching and regular encouragement of behavioral changes guide the individuals you work with toward their personal visions that will over time align with your own.

This is much more effective than showing displeasure and goading them whenever they fall short of your expectations or hopes.

What you do and don't do: The damage is equal

In your leadership role, what you do and don't do is equally as important an indicator as what is expected. When we only pick our errors, defects or omissions and demonstrate frustration, anger and disappointment toward the people we want to lead, then we direct their attention and energy in a negative direction. They will be much more likely to develop fears, anxieties and aversions. Failure to recognize effort and progress is also very discouraging.

By adopting the mirror self image approach, your management will no longer include ineffectual behaviors. Developing others is commonly the hardest part of a management or leadership role. Developing the ability to use vision to inspire people to become better versions of the self is not a job that we all intrinsically know how to do. It becomes even more difficult when development must intertwine with corporate vision that will ensure execution, as a vision without execution is hallucination. This matters even more so in the business world when results directly measure productivity.

Corporate results reflect the quality and size of the body of employee's self image. Inspire your employees by giving them reason to believe in themselves. Never doubt or withhold praise. We all have our own anxieties, and leadership needs to a guiding hand that will help each employee to overcome theirs.

Image credit: Flickr/Yahoo

Laura Morrissey is a writer for Everything Disc UK, a Team Cohesion tool for assessing human behavior in the corporate world. She loves to engage leaders and professionals globally through her motivational and leadership articles.

By Margaret Uttke

Leaders often struggle to understand which choices are best when it comes to investing in sustainability. One way to improve is to enable stronger business case development and associated analyses of both tangible and intangible benefits connected to these investments.

In response to this challenge, FEMSA Foundation and Antea Group founded the Monetization Working Group (MWG) in March 2014. This cross-sectoral group of industry, NGO and private-sector leaders focuses on enabling better, more sustainable business decisions.

Group participants are collaborating on the development of a business case capability development curriculum. To test and refine this curriculum, FEMSA Foundation, Antea Group and the Nature Conservancy (TNC) have partnered on a series of pilot workshops delivered to select teams working on Water Funds – a series of water conservation initiatives involving local watersheds throughout Mexico, Central and South America, collectively known as the Latin American Water Funds Partnership.

These Water Fund initiatives not only impact the sustainability of the watershed itself; they also impact the local and global communities through impassioned and informed stakeholder engagement. By involving stakeholders and creating a clear understanding of the problem, the Water Fund teams are able to develop scientifically-based solutions that aim to benefit all those concerned with the local watershed. The teams’ ability to articulate the value of those solutions, however, is a key issue; and it represents part of the broader challenge the MWG is working to address on a global scale.

With that context in mind, I sat down with Carlos Hurtado, manager of sustainable development at FEMSA Foundation; Hugo Contreras, Latin American water security director for the Nature Conservancy; and Tod Christenson, senior consultant with Antea Group, to get their perspectives on this project and their ultimate goal of accelerating better, more sustainable business decisions.

Margaret Uttke: What are some of the challenges you face in communicating the benefits of these Water Fund initiatives? 

Carlos Hurtado: First, they’re hard to convey because they are usually loosely defined – things like brand reputation and community involvement. We have to go out and dissect these vague ideas to quantify the value – to make what seems intangible easier to understand.

Hugo Contreras: To add to that, I work with the scientists on these teams, who are very interested in writing something a guy like me will understand … but not in terms that are simple or actionable for stakeholders. We need to bridge that gap; that means we need the science behind our solution to be easily understood.

Part of the problem is that our stakeholders have nothing to compare performance of these Water Funds to except information that is based on perceptions, not hard fact. There is also a gap between the time you start acting and the time you see the results from conservation efforts. Benefits to these longer cycles can be hard to see when you are faced with short term issues.

MU: Given these challenges your teams face, what are your goals for this pilot? 

CH: We’re seeking to increase the skill and capacity of the Water Fund teams -- to better articulate the business case. But this project goes beyond our own organizations; we’re not alone in facing these challenges, and the workshop series is an opportunity for us to provide concrete examples and test broader concepts we’re developing through the Monetization Working Group.

Tod Christenson: As Carlos has indicated, leading into these workshops, we’ve developed a business curriculum to advance the business case development and delivery capabilities of these Water Fund teams as they work to engage various social, governmental and business stakeholders on specific watershed projects. Based on our discussions in the MWG, this includes several key components:

1. Understanding the concept of shared business value


2. Building and presenting an effective business case to targeted stakeholders


3. Applying quantification and monetization principles to their existing investment


4. Systematically monetizing benefit estimates and framing uncertainty

It’s really designed around the concept of creating change through collective action – and the way to ensure that is through the business case articulation.

HC: We think it’s important that participants will be able to apply content learning to their current Water Fund business case presentations utilized in stakeholder discussion today, better articulating how we may enrich these presentations for more effective engagement tomorrow; and practice the skill of monetizing the projects – in other words, deconstructing, quantifying and monetizing the business benefits to better communicate with stakeholders and spur effective collective action.

MU: What does success for this project look like five to 10 years down the road?

HC: First, we engage corporations and individuals – and by engage, I mean show them the reasons why it makes sense to act. Second, we will have convinced many cities that conservation is important and there is a cost and benefit they can internalize and communicate to their stakeholders.

TC: And we will have convinced those cities and other stakeholders of the tangible benefits to watershed conservation because TNC’s scientists and FEMSA’s sustainability leadership are able to clearly articulate the business case.

CH: For the Water Funds, I really want to see effective stakeholder engagement, meaning companies get involved not only because it’s good to do and they care about their city, but because it makes sense from a business perspective.

On a broader level, I would say sustainability is ingrained in the business conversation; we will start talking about sustainability and investments on every aspect -- supply chain, operations, etc.

MC: So let’s talk about the broader issue we’re grappling with: Why monetize sustainability investment decision-making?

TC: There are a number of reasons why. For example, the failure to monetize represents a clear obstacle to business progress. In a 2013 study done by the UN Global Compact and Accenture, thirty-seven percent of CEOs said the lack of a clear link to business value was a critical factor in deterring faster action on sustainability.

CH: That’s the common challenge we all face, isn’t it? Trouble translating common knowledge concepts or intricate solutions to hard and clear choices. It’s a lot easier for high level executives to make the right choice when the value is clear.

TC: Carlos nailed it. Today’s sustainability investment options are extensive, ranging from relatively straightforward energy conservation projects to complex multi-year supply-chain initiatives. While doing any or all of these could yield significant benefits, leaders often struggle to determine which will generate the greatest, most enduring value.

We need to enable stronger business case development and associated analyses of both the tangible and intangible benefits connected to these investments. That will lead to better investment choices and results.

CH: But I don’t want people to think it’s just about putting numbers to our projects – there’s a real opportunity to create a substantive, actionable model that bridges this gap between the practitioners and decision-makers. If we can compare, meaning monetize, these initiative benefits and speak clearly to both public and private sector outlets, that would be tremendous for companies and society. And that’s the whole premise behind our broader efforts with the Monetization Working Group.

MU: Beyond the pilot project, how is the Monetization Working Group tackling the issue of articulating value and enabling better decision-making?

TC: This curriculum we’re developing and testing is part of the answer. After extensive review and collaboration, the MWG has embarked on this initiative to build a Sustainability Investment Business Case Development and Monetization Curriculum geared toward sustainability professionals and business decision-makers.

CH: The idea is that we will enhance capacity in making intangibles tangible by providing tools and skills to better quantify the benefits, thereby strengthening overall investment business decisions.

HC: To put it another way, Carlos: complexity turned into simplicity. This curriculum project will allow us to grasp a complex concept and translate it into simple information that will enable us to better describe how sustainability initiatives like the Water Funds benefit the environment, local communities and our business investors – true examples of shared value.

MU: Why should other organizations get involved in this global effort?

CH: This is an issue that keeps me up at night, and I know FEMSA’s not alone in this problem. Monetizing sustainability can be hard to define, but this initiative promises to generate real knowledge and tools to advance not only FEMSA’s work, but the sustainability sector as a whole.

HC: As an NGO, the Nature Conservancy has always looked for alternative ways of communicating conservation and engaging people. We don’t believe in confrontation, we believe in convincing. For us, having this toolkit is a perfect fit, as it will help to translate our initiatives in clear terms that make economic sense and encourage collective action.

TC: We’re still at the beginning of this journey, and this is an opportunity for cross-sectoral companies to shape the conversation together, through both the MWG discussions and contributing to the ongoing curriculum-building efforts.

Want to become engaged in the conversation? Feel free to reach out to Tod (tod.christenson@anteagroup.com) or Carlos (carlos.hurtado@femsa.com.mx) to learn more about the Monetization Working Group’s journey.

About Our Interviewees:

Tod Christenson, Senior Consultant, Antea Group
A consultant to private industry for more than 29 years, Tod partners with clients to develop and implement fit-for-purpose and innovative solutions to drive sustainability across the entire value chain. Tod is one of the principal innovators of Antea Group’s Accounting for Sustainability - AA4S solution, and the Director of the Beverage Industry Environmental Roundtable, as well as the Healthcare Plastics Recycling Council.

Hugo Contreras, Latin America Water Security Director, The Nature Conservancy
Before joining The Nature Conservancy in 2014, Hugo was a business development and institutional relations director for Bal-Ondeo, Mexico´s leading private water utility. In his more than 10 years with the company, he designed and implemented a new business model for private operators to provide services to local water utilities, as well as developed the first comparative study of the performance of water companies in Mexico. He has also led the environment and good government practice at Thesis Consultores, served as Chief of Staff for the Underministry for Planning, and Director for Natural Resource Economics at the Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries in Mexico.

Carlos Hurtado Aguilar, Manager of Sustainable Development of Water Resources, FEMSA Foundation
Carlos has directed FEMSA Foundation’s water related programs since its creation in 2008. From 2005 to 2008 he coordinated strategic projects for the Presidency of Mexico, municipal governments, and international organizations such as the United Nations while working as a Senior Consultant at the Graduate School for Public Management of Tecnológico de Monterrey. Before that he was Senior Analyst in structured finance for subnational governments at Banorte.

Image credit:  Shutterstock

Margaret Uttke is the Solutions Marketing Manager for Antea Group, an international environmental engineering and consulting firm.  She currently serves as the Communications Director for the Monetization Working Group, as well as the Beverage Industry Environmental Roundtable.  Margaret works with clients to develop sustainable solutions with a business first approach.

New emergency rules for water use are now in effect in California as government agencies and residents attempt to address long-term water needs as well as cope with immediate shortages.

Akin to its industry peers, Irvine, California-based Golden State Foods (GSF) requires lots in the way of water to produce and distribute food products for the likes of McDonald's and other restaurant chains and food retailers. Founded in 1947 and growing alongside California's burgeoning agricultural sector, GSF has been addressing the issue of water use and conservation directly since at least 2008 – not only in California, but across what's grown to be a multinational business.

Part and parcel of institutionalizing its overall sustainability strategy, GSF in 2014 set an organization-wide goal to reduce water consumption 20 percent by 2020.

“We recognize that water is a vital natural resource that is of utmost importance to our business, our associates, and the communities in which we operate,” Dimetria Jackson, GSF's director of sustainability and corporate social responsibility (CSR), told TriplePundit.

Doing its part to conserve water in California

Aiming to reduce water usage by 25 percent state-wide, the California State Water Resources Control Board in early May instituted the first mandatory water reductions in the state's history. The emergency water conservation measures went into effect this month. Since then, it has even gone to the extreme of curtailing diversions of water to senior rights-holders in the Delta, San Joaquin and Sacramento watersheds. Fiercely protected, some of these senior water rights, which are mostly owned by farmers, have been held since as far back as 1903.

Having developed and grown alongside water access and California agriculture, Golden State Foods is well aware of the history of water resources and use in the state – and it's intimately involved with water conservation efforts. Management takes the view that ingraining water conservation into its corporate culture will boost the company's economic performance and financial bottom line, as well raise consciousness and contribute to improving water management in California and beyond.

Its 2020, water conservation and broader sustainability goals, “will improve the overall efficiency of our operations; reduce the company’s environmental impact and its economic spend by reducing costs associated with wastewater, waste disposal, fuel and utility expenses; and engage our associates in corporate social responsibility and sustainability practices," Jackson continued.

GSF's distribution center in Chicago, for example, recently earned LEED Gold status. There, GSF harvests rainwater in a 40,000-gallon cistern. The harvested rainwater is used to irrigate the surrounding landscape. In addition, GSF Chicago makes use of ionized water, which is a by-product of the hydrogen fuel cells used to produce electricity, for cleaning warehouse floors.

GSF's water conservation and sustainability plans

More broadly, the GSF distribution centers dedicated to supplying food products for McDonald’s have collectively reduced their water usage by 2 percent compared to a 2012 baseline.

Across the organization, GSF uses reclaimed water for cleaning and landscaping, and it has installed high-efficiency plumbing fixtures in most of its facilities. Water and sprinkler audits, as well as leak checks, are conducted regularly. The company even has a hotline number posted in facility bathrooms and kitchens, so employees can call facility maintenance personnel to report leaks or water waste.

Company-wide, GSF's innovative water conservation policy encompasses:

• Using reclaimed water for washing vehicles, cleaning and irrigation


• High efficiency plumbing fixtures in most facilities


• Posting monthly water use at facilities to show progress toward water-saving goals


• Planting native, water efficient landscaping


• Conducting sprinkler and water audits


• Posting a hotline number in bathrooms and kitchens to report leaks or water waste to facility managers or maintenance personnel
  Educating associates on water conservation and seeking their input.

The CSR and sustainability goals GSF instituted last year extend well beyond reducing water use, however:

• Reducing GSF’s carbon footprint by 20 percent


• Achieving zero waste-to-landfill at all facilities


• Implementing an EMS at 100 percent of its locations


• Incorporating renewable energy/alternative fuel in 100 percent of its fleet


• Active engagement of at least 75 percent of its associates in these programs

Furthermore, GSF is focused on improving wellness among its associates (employees), and responsible sourcing of the materials and other resources it needs to see to its day-to-day operations and long-term viability, Jackson added.

CSR-Sustainability Champions

GSF's efforts to ingrain CSR and sustainability into its corporate culture extends to the creation of its CSR-Sustainability Champions program. Led by a steering committee, CSR-Sustainability group members are drawn from across the organization's functional lines. Representatives from each of its domestic U.S. facilities, as well as IT, finance, and health and wellness, are actively involved in a range of activities, from setting CSR and sustainability goals to implementing associated initiatives.

GSF's commitment to assuring sustainable water use and, more broadly, the overall environmental sustainability of its operations is also evident in its Statement of Environmental Policy, Jackson noted. The policy, she pointed out, “recognizes environmental protection as one of our guiding principles and a key component of sound business practices.”

Looking ahead, “We recognize that there are many opportunities for improvement and through GSF’s top-down/bottom-up approach, management and associates continually seek to identify additional solutions to help achieve our goals and objectives,” Jackson told 3p.

*Image credits: Golden State Foods

This article is part of a series on “The ROI of Sustainability,” written with the support of MeterHero. MeterHero helps companies and organizations offset their water and energy footprints through consumer engagement. To follow along with the rest of the series, click here.

At Sustainable Brands 2015, we asked thought leaders to define the ROI of Sustainability in their words. In this video, Jonathan Atwood of Unilever shares some thoughts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr7X230ZH6M

 

About Jonathan Atwood: Jonathan is Unilever’s Vice President of Sustainable Living and Corporate Communications, North America. He joined the company in May 2012 and is responsible for Communications, Unilever Brand, and the shape and implementation of the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan in North America.

In 2007, Jonathan founded Common Way Communications, a public affairs and ommunications consultancy based in Vermont. There he worked as a consultant to the Global Issues Group, a coalition of global chocolate and cocoa processing companies and trade associations working on responsible labor practices in the cocoa sectors of West Africa.